“The fact is that both Rick Perry and Rick Santorum are, thankfully, pro-life.”
False. Perry supported abortion in the case of rape and Incest until as late as december.
“My comment reflects my recognition that marriage and most issues of the family historically have been decided by the people at the state and local level.”
Also false. Reynolds clearly demonstrates that it is the responsibility of the federal government to enforce marriage. This is why Utah could not be admitted by supporting polygamy. The federal government can only enforce, it can no more change the definition then it can drop Habeaus Corpus. The definition of marriage is an essential part of the English common law.
Read the decision. This red state article does not even understand the constitutional issues surrounding Gay marriage. This is why Santorum is right and Perry is wrong.
As for the rest - Santorum’s plan is better than Paul Ryan’s. He argues in favor of cutting back to 2008 levels immediately, with a further 5 trillion in cuts on top of that.
You can argue that his record speaks otherwise, but his platform is clear. The state cannot continue as it has and the federal government must spend within their means.
That article, is a terrible article. I could write a better one and if you pay me, I’d be happy to write an article explaining why Rick Santorum’s position is constitutionally correct, and why Rick Perry’s position is constitutionally incorrect.
You choose platform over record?
Did no one tell you that politicians tell voters only what the voters want to hear?
(shakes head at the stupidity of taking a politician’s words at face value)